Credit where credit is due


if you get a compliment on a physical feature, you say "thank you" but while we benefit from our pieces and parts (eye color, ear size, ;) whatever), those are luck of the draw. we don't own them the way we do the things we actively choose. yet despite this fact, physical beauty is more often prized over style.

if you could only have one, which would you prefer, beauty or style?

14 comments:

Iheartfashion said...

As a teenager I would've said physical beauty, without a thought, but now that I'm in my 30's, my answer has changed. How does that cliche go? "Beauty is fleeting; style is eternal", or something like that.

Briana said...

Style. There is nothing more attractive to me than a woman who makes her own beauty - especially if it is unconventional.

La Primavera said...

I am not sure, I think this is a complex question. Is this about extremes? So if you would have style you'd look like a bus hit you or if you would be beautiful you would dress like trailer trash? If these are the extremes, I have to say I cannot choose.

I would like to say style over beauty, but I am not sure if I can. Many times, if you are beautiful and show it, even the dullest outfit can look like haute couture. So maybe I would take beauty. What about you?

editor said...

you know iheartfashion, as a teenager i felt a disconnect between my appearance and my being, my "self." i guess i still do. i mean what i look like is really more of an issue for those looking at me (and of course consequently how they treat me, thereby making it my issue. i realize that). so i always valued style/taste over beauty, yet the media feeds us more images of beauty than style, so i'm still left with an unsatisfied appetite for that. behind-the-scenes people are infinitely more interesting to me than the mannequins.

briana - yes. beauty is beauty and style is magic.

la primavera - i really respect your caution on this one. it's very practical/realistic, and i agree with your assessment that in the real world, it would technically be foolish to choose style over beauty, as one is a greater commodity, in a very general sense. if you want a career in fashion/style, obviously a talent with that is more beneficial than a pretty mug. let's say, for the sake of this question, that the starting point is ultra plain. you have no style, and visually you are plain (subjective for sure, but that is just to say, no hideous disfigurement or particular physical challenge that overpowers your appearance and the impression you make on others). starting at 0, not a negative.
would it have been easier if i had asked beauty over brains/personality? i have met technically beautiful people and when they speak, it's over, they're done.
but beauty over style is a more interesting choice imo. i think beauty has a greater advantage, but i would rather receive accolades and such for style than beauty. so that's my answer. style.

Anonymous said...

i would say style with the clarification that picking it over beauty does Not mean that i am cornering the choice of "style" into:

style with ugly to create the "ooogly factor"... ugly but so interesting and tasteful you cant peel your eyes away.

i'd say Plain with style is more enduring than beauty, so that is why Style would be my choice. Ironically, plain appearance with style can become beauty.

Carlene said...

Beauty, because I already have style. I want to know how the other half lives.

:)

Le Portillon said...

Style, definitely. True style can transform anyone into a beauty, I think. Besides, physical beauty is overrated. Imperfection can be much more interesting.

Love that picture of Vreeland! She's inspired me more than anyone.

Candid Cool said...

At 1st thought wouldn’t a lot of us say: Give me beauty!
But then I think, Carine Roitfeld, Lou Doillon, Sophia Coppola, & Charolette Gainsbourg, they are not your typical “beauties” or “buxom blondes” but to some are incredibly beautiful, sexy, and have an unstudied style. Even Kate Moss (not the best example considering she is a model), but I think what makes her so beautiful is just how plain her features are.

So then I say I'd chose style.

editor said...

candid cool - great examples. carine roitfeld, who basically looks like iggy pop, is totally captivating.

le portillon - some people view christy brinkley as beautiful. i find her so symmetrical that she's down right boring.

editor said...

candid cool - great examples. carine roitfeld, who basically looks like iggy pop, is totally captivating.

le portillon - some people view christy brinkley as beautiful. i find her so symmetrical that she's down right boring.

Iheartfashion said...

Editor: I've never "got" Christie Brinkley either. Same with current model Raquel Zimmerman who is said to be almost perfectly symmetrical. Boring!
Quirks add character which is infinitely more interesting than perfection, in my opinion.

editor said...

iheartfashion - i'm nodding.

dianabobar said...

I don't care is people think I'm beautiful or not, but I do appreciate it when they call me stylish. So yeah, style because I love fashion more that striving to have a perfect face/body/looks. I think it's all about personality and how you show it through the clothes you choose to wear.

Anonymous said...

I raised my young son- now a 20 year old man- to appreciate style over looks in women- as looks are bred or bought- style is earned.
So, I go with style-- I have seen perfectly fine looking women/girls with no style/personality-- and women/girls not blessed that way with style! They are the exciting fun interesting women/girls in my opinion.
Oh- I am his mother.